Author
Topic: Canon is on top again! (Read 34674 times)

With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks.

And it sucks for those using lower tiered Canon products with older sensor tech, but Canon's flagship has certainly been crowned the undisputed king of pro bodies. Hopefully now the lower tiered products get the same superior sensor in the future. May be 6D is that breed of new superior sensors coming out. Watch out sonikon, Canon is back with a vengeance!

Logged

canon rumors FORUM

What's your point exactly? Yes, the 1Dx is a bloody marvellous camera, we all know that. Well established fact. And the other Canons are trailing the Nikons badly (we're talking sensors here). Also well established fact.

Sony and Nikon are leading the way and will for a while I suspect. Why is the broad range of Canon DSLRs suddenly 'back with a vengeance' just because the1Dx is great?

I actually just had a conversation with another photographer a couple of days ago about Canon sensors trailing Nikons. He made the point that (coming from a film background), he felt that the Canon sensors (specifically talking about the 5Dc, 5d3) that he felt they gave a more film like quality in terms of colors and representation as opposed to Nikon (really Sony) sensors which was much more flat. He also made the point that certain things which may contribute to that look is baked into the chip & low level functionality such as the ADC's, initial hardware/software readouts, etc which would be potentially difficult to duplicate through post processing.

Just an interesting observation from someone else. I, personally, haven't looked at enough Nikon vs Canon photos in detail to see a difference, and I'm not coming from a film background.

Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?

Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?

Did the words 'personal style' escape you?Are you unaware of the fact that photography is art?Did you really mean to offer OFFENSIVE criticism?

What's your point exactly? Yes, the 1Dx is a bloody marvellous camera, we all know that. Well established fact. And the other Canons are trailing the Nikons badly (we're talking sensors here). Also well established fact.

Sony and Nikon are leading the way and will for a while I suspect. Why is the broad range of Canon DSLRs suddenly 'back with a vengeance' just because the1Dx is great?

Does he really need a point, what's so bad about talking about a great camera? We need alot more positive chat here considering all the negative. I would sooner have great AF, ISO and FPS rather than high MP. Not to mention great glass.

Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?

Were you dropped on the head as a baby?Did your parents never teach you any manners?Are you just a jerk?

Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?

Do you really think we should take you seriously when you come off so rude?

Oh...and did you hear...photography is an ART. We can all take license.

I actually just had a conversation with another photographer a couple of days ago about Canon sensors trailing Nikons. He made the point that (coming from a film background), he felt that the Canon sensors (specifically talking about the 5Dc, 5d3) that he felt they gave a more film like quality in terms of colors and representation as opposed to Nikon (really Sony) sensors which was much more flat. He also made the point that certain things which may contribute to that look is baked into the chip & low level functionality such as the ADC's, initial hardware/software readouts, etc which would be potentially difficult to duplicate through post processing.

Just an interesting observation from someone else. I, personally, haven't looked at enough Nikon vs Canon photos in detail to see a difference, and I'm not coming from a film background.

interesting, then he do not know what he is talking about regarding CFA, profiles, colors etc etc

Sure he does. Every device, be it film or yes, even an electronic sensor or an ADC, has a natural response curve that will affect color reproduction. I don't believe the argument was that it was "impossible" to replicate via post processing...just that it would be difficult to replicate...which is indeed true. If one really wanted to invest the time (and it would be a LOT of time), they could probably create a camera profile that tweaked the the tone curves for each channel to produce color more reminiscent of their favorite film with any camera's RAW...but that would be a LOT of work, and that person would really need to understand film response like the back of their hand. (I love the look of drum scans of 4x5 Velvia 50 slide film...some of the best natural warm color I've ever seen. I've spent a LOT of time trying to replicate it in my own photos taken with Canon DSLR's using curves in Photoshop. I finally stopped bothering after countless hours because the task was nearly impossible, even though I had good reference information regarding Velvia 50's natural response curves and dozens of sample photos to work with.)

There are even members of this forum who will only use certain lines of Canon cameras because they prefer the natural color strait out of the camera better than what they get from a different model, even though it would still be a Canon model.